Cover not available
Article published In:
Applied Pragmatics
Vol. 4:1 (2022) ► pp.33–62

Epistemic stance in L2 English discourse

The development of pragmatic strategies in study abroad

ORCID logo | Notre Dame Seishin University
ORCID logo | Akita International University
| Akita International University
This study investigates the development of pragmatic strategies in study abroad among a group of upper-intermediate to advanced second language (L2) learners studying in English as a lingua franca (ELF) context. For this purpose, their use of epistemic stance markers (EMs) was observed before, during, immediately after, and six months after their study abroad over a period of two years. An analysis of our qualitative results found significant inter-speaker variations in the use of EMs. This close analysis demonstrates that learners with lower-level speaking skills relied more on lexical verbs and adverbs when expressing their epistemic stance than those with higher-level speaking skills. This finding is in accordance with previous studies. Furthermore, our qualitative analysis of two learners demonstrates their pragmatic development through a more nuanced hedged assertion, as well as the non-linear and complex nature of their development. In addition, the pedagogical implications of this study are discussed from the ELF perspective.
Keywords: epistemic stance, study abroad, L2 English, L1 Japanese, pragmatic competence, English as a lingua franca
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.L2 pragmatic development in ELF and SA
  • 3.Epistemic stance and learners’ use of EMs
  • 4.Method
    • 4.1Participants
    • 4.2Instrumentation
    • 4.3Data analysis
  • 5.Quantitative findings
    • 5.1Overall results
    • 5.2Modal auxiliaries
    • 5.3Lexical verbs
    • 5.4Adverbs
  • 6.Qualitative findings
    • 6.1Background
    • 6.2PRE
    • 6.3DUR
    • 6.4POST-1
    • 6.5POST-2
  • 7.Discussion
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 9 February 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.20007.kiz
References (53)
References
Aijmer, K. (2002). Modality in advanced Swedish learners’ written interlanguage. In S. Granger, J. Hung, & ‎S. Petch-Tyson (Eds.), Computer learner corpora, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 55–76). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2001). Evaluating the empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction in pragmatics? In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 13–32). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. S. (1993). Learning the rules of academic talk: A longitudinal study of pragmatic change. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(3), 279–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Salsbury, T. (2004). The organization of turns in the disagreements of L2 learners: A longitudinal perspective. In D. Boxer & A. D. Cohen (Eds.), Studying speaking to inform second language learning (pp. 199–227). Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Baumgarten, N., & House, J. (2010). I think and I don’t know in English as lingua franca and native English discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(5), 1184–1200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D. (2006). Stance in spoken and written university registers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(2), 97–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Longman.Google Scholar
Caffi, C. (1999). On mitigation. Journal of Pragmatics, 311, 881–909. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, H. M. (2008). Socializing identities through speech style: Learners of Japanese as a foreign language. Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Bot, K. (2008). Introduction: Second language development as a dynamic process. Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 166–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dings, A. (2014). Interactional competence and the development of alignment activity. Modern Language Journal, 98(3), 742–756. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). The psychology of the language learner revisited. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, J. W. (2007). The stance triangle. In R. Englebretson (Ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction (pp. 139–182). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fordyce, K. (2009). A comparative study of learner corpora of spoken and written discursive language: Focusing on the use of epistemic forms by Japanese EFL learners. Hiroshima Studies in Language and Language Education, 12(1), 135–150.Google Scholar
(2014). The differential effects of explicit and implicit instruction on EFL learners’ use of epistemic stance. Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 6–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gablasova, D., & Brezina, V. (2015). Does speaker role affect the choice of epistemic adverbials in L2 speech? Evidence from the Trinity Lancaster Corpus. Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics, 117–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., McEnery, T., & Boyd, E. (2017). Epistemic stance in spoken L2 English: The effect of task and speaker style. Applied Linguistics, 38(5), 613–637. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J. (2009). Conversation analysis as social theory. In B. S. Turner (Ed.), The new Blackwell companion to social theory (pp. 300–320). Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
House, J., & Kasper, G. (1981). Politeness markers in English and German. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), Conversational routine: Explorations in standardized communication situations and prepatterned speech. Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K. (1996). “I don’t quite follow”: Making sense of a modifier. Language Awareness, 5(2), 91–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K., & Milton, J. (1997). Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6(2), 183–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2005). Hooking the reader: A corpus study of evaluative that in abstracts. English for Specific Purposes, 24(2), 123–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ishida, K. (2009). Indexing stance in interaction with the Japanese desu/masu and plain forms. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), Pragmatic competence (pp. 41–67). Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Iwasaki, N. (2010). Style shifts among Japanese learners before and after study abroad in Japan: Becoming active social agents in Japanese. Applied Linguistics, 31(1), 45–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Learning L2 Japanese “politeness” and “impoliteness”: Young American men’s dilemmas during study abroad. Japanese Language and Literature, 451, 67–106.Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, G. (2010). Pragmatic functions of parenthetical I think . In G. Kaltenböck, W. Mihatsch, & S. Schneider (Eds.), New approaches to hedging (pp. 237–266). Emerald. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kizu, M., Pizziconi, B., & Gyogi, E. (2019). The particle ne in the development of interactional positioning in L2 Japanese. East Asian Pragmatics, 4(1), 113–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kizu, M., Pizziconi, B., & Iwasaki, N. (2013). Modal markers in Japanese: A study of learners’ use before and after study abroad. Japanese Language and Literature, 471, 93–133.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1973). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 21, 458–508. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Masuda, K. (2011). Acquiring interactional competence in a study abroad context: Japanese language learners’ use of the interactional particle ne . Modern Language Journal, 95(4), 519–540. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsumura, S. (2003). Modelling the relationships among interlanguage pragmatic development, L2 proficiency, and exposure to L2. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 465–491. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Longman.Google Scholar
Salsbury, T., & Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2000). Oppositional talk and the acquisition of modality in L2 English. In B. Swierzbin, F. Morris, M. E. Anderson, C. A. Klee, & E. Tarone (Eds.), Social and cognitive factors in second language acquisition: Selected proceedings of the 1999 Second Language Research Forum (pp. 57–76). Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Sawyer, M. (1992). The development of pragmatics in Japanese as a second language: The sentence-final particle ne . In G. Kasper (Ed.), Pragmatics of Japanese as a native and target language (pp. 83–125). University of Hawai’i Press.Google Scholar
Schauer, G. A. (2006). The development of ESL learners’ pragmatic competence: A longitudinal investigation of awareness and production. Pragmatics and Language Learning, 111, 135–164.Google Scholar
(2009). Interlanguage pragmatic development: The study abroad context. Continuum.Google Scholar
Shively, R. L. (2011). L2 pragmatic development in study abroad: A longitudinal study of Spanish service encounters. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(6), 1818–1835. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siegal, M. (1996). The role of learner subjectivity in second language sociolinguistic competency: Western women learning Japanese. Applied Linguistics, 17(3), 356–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2008). Cognition, language contact, and the development of pragmatic comprehension in a study-abroad context. Language Learning, 58(1), 33–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). The effect of L2 proficiency and study-abroad experience on pragmatic comprehension. Language Learning, 61(3), 904–939. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). Pragmatic socialization in an English-medium university in Japan. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 52(2), 157–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Developing interactional competence in a Japanese study abroad context. Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Contexts and pragmatics learning: Findings and implications of study abroad research. Language Teaching, 51(1), 124–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, N., & Ishihara, N. (2018). The pragmatics of English as a lingua franca: Research and pedagogy in the era of globalization. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 381, 80–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, N., & Roever, C. (2017). Second language pragmatics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 91–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M. H., de Bot, K., & Lowie, W. (Eds.). (2011). A dynamic approach to second language development: Methods and techniques. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xiao-Desai, Y., & Wong, K. F. (2017). Epistemic stance in Chinese heritage language writing – A developmental view. Chinese as a Second Language Research, 6(1), 73–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zalaltdinova, L. (2018). “Stop doing this at once!”: The preferred use of modality for advice-giving by English language learners. Intercultural Pragmatics, 15(3), 349–372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, G. Q., & Sabet, P. G. P. (2016). Elastic “I think”: Stretching over L1 and L2. Applied Linguistics, 37(3), 334–353. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Gablasova, Dana, Luke Harding, Vaclav Brezina & Jamie Dunlea
2024. Expressions of epistemic stance in computer-mediated L2 speaking assessment. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 10:1 ► pp. 183 ff. DOI logo
Tajeddin, Zia & Neda Khanlarzadeh
2024. The Role of Learner Variables in Pragmatic Development during Study Abroad: A Systematic Review. Languages 9:3 ► pp. 96 ff. DOI logo
Zhu, Junqi, Mengdi Gu, Li Yang, Shoukui Xun, Ming Wan & Jie Li
2022. Academic Adaptation of International Students in China: Evidence from the Grounded Theory and Structure Equation Model. Sustainability 15:1 ► pp. 692 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.